We have always learnt that adjectives qualify/modify nouns. Thus we have learnt : a big ball, tall girl, red shoes, brick house, etc. If the ball is big( relative to another ball next to it) and if it can be pointed out as the same by all, then we can definitely say " big ball". But when we use it ( and we do, and that's how we teach our lil ones too) as a stand alone " this is a big ball" then there is scope for disagreement.
Just imagine how easily " mean boy" " sad girl", " angry person" " over friendly person" " party person" etc, is used and associated with people. If there is a context to it , the adjective might hold true but often the adjective (by virtue of position in reference to the person) is stuck to a person and often used to describe a person, (like, " that___ person" ) even when the context changes.
If a ball can be a red/round/big/ soft/ , i.e a color, a shape , any attribute, isn't a person so much more than 1 quality that is often used as a defining one to describe him or her?
In my field of work we consciously use the phrase " child with autism", but isn't that something we should always use in our acceptance and inclusion of all people? A person is "struggling with depression" rather than a "depressed person.", a person who enjoys parties rather than " party person", person who makes questionable choices rather than " bad person".
Consciously practicing it brings into awareness and therefore acceptance of , the whole person.
A shift in our own choice of words, a correction of when it is used by our family and friends can slowly but surely help all see and include the complete person, because everyone is perfectly flawed.
No comments:
Post a Comment